How come these epoxides don't open up as trans? Aren't they still attacking from the back?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

510586

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2014
Messages
1,056
Reaction score
290
14370879117911348305308.jpg

Members don't see this ad.
 
I could be wrong, but from what I can tell, there's no actual cis/trans here. We don't have any double bonds.
Oh it was written like that in the back of the text. Typically if we add a group it adds on the opposite side if there is stereochem though. Here is an example
 

Attachments

  • 1437089139073-1732573118.jpg
    1437089139073-1732573118.jpg
    76.9 KB · Views: 28
Members don't see this ad :)
The reaction are examples of SN2, so the nucleophiles attack from the back and the products have inverted stereochemistry. But I do not see any stereocenters in the reactants and products.
 
The reaction are examples of SN2, so the nucleophiles attack from the back and the products have inverted stereochemistry. But I do not see any stereocenters in the reactants and products.
Oh I meant the above picture in the reply to Feralis, not the original. I was just double checking if I had the correct idea of what was happening. But I think it is. Thanks!
 

It would attack from the opposite side, but there is no stereochemistry to show here. The reactions are fine, just basic nucleophilic attacks. Only when other substituents are placed on the epoxide, can one appreciate the stereochemistry. The better conformation would have been to place the groups on opposite sides.

Hope this helps.

Dr. Jim Romano
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top